By Hiran de Silva
Most people who know me know that I am deeply committed to Excel, not as a hobby, not as a commodity skill, but as a vehicle for solving real business challenges. Over the years, my methods have helped organisations escape “Excel Hell” and move to “Excel Done Well.” That transformation is not about memorising formulas or watching quick tutorials — it’s about strategic thinking, creative problem-solving, and the ability to design systems that scale.
That is why I have chosen a very deliberate teaching model: AI for core content, and in-person delivery for what really matters.
Why AI, and How I Use It
Let me be clear: when I say I use AI in my program, I do not mean I asked ChatGPT to “write a course on Excel in 10 chapters.” That approach — and sadly it is being promoted in some circles — is not teaching, it’s fakery. It produces content with no expertise, no insight, and no value beyond the superficial.
What I do is very different.
I create my teaching tracks as dialogues or screenplays between two or more characters. This simulates the real learning process: questions, confusions, counterpoints, and clarifications. Anyone who has taught knows that learners often get stuck in the same areas, and the best way to address those points is through dialogue — anticipating and responding to the questions as they arise.
AI helps me turn my raw ideas (spoken into my phone) into draft screenplays, scripts, and structured lessons. Think of it as my digital production team: it captures my expertise, organises it, and presents it in a way that makes the learning track consistent, reusable, and easy to follow. I remain the originator, the editor, and the final authority.
I also extend this into a customised AI assistant for students in my program. Unlike generic ChatGPT answers, which may throw unfamiliar code or inconsistent advice, my assistant provides responses aligned with my framework — my patterns, my code modules, my methodologies. Learners don’t get gobbledygook, they get reusable building blocks, delivered in a way that matches what they’ve been taught. This consistency keeps everyone on the same page and allows them to focus on creativity and strategy rather than decoding alien syntax.
That’s the role of AI in my teaching: to systematise the repeatable, mechanical content and to make my intellectual capital available on demand — but always within the framework I’ve designed.
Where the Human Teacher is Essential
So what is my role? My role is the map and the navigation.
Learning the mechanics — turning the steering wheel, pressing the accelerator, switching on the indicators — can be taught once, packaged, and delivered efficiently. But driving from A to B requires more: choosing the route, responding to roadblocks, making judgment calls when the unexpected happens.
That’s where a human teacher is irreplaceable.
In my workshops and surgeries, I help learners face real business challenges and ask the right questions:
- What is the real need here?
- How do we apply these principles in this messy situation?
- Which route gets us to the right destination?
This is where critical thinking, creativity, and empathy matter. And this is where the mainstream model fails, because most of what’s out there has it the wrong way round.
The Wrong Way Round
Here is the paradox:
- Mainstream online teaching uses humans for product demonstrations — the equivalent of reading out the User Guide, but on camera.
- Then, when learners actually need the human touch — “How do I apply this in my case?” — the teacher is absent.
Unless you are selling drills on QVC, recording yourself reading the manual is an inefficient use of human effort. Where the human you is needed is in interaction, in problem-solving, in real-time dialogue. But that is exactly what the current model avoids.
Why? Because the incentive is visibility. To be liked, to be seen as an expert (even if you’re not), and to avoid situations where a real question might expose the limits of your knowledge.
The result: shiny drill bits, but holes in the wrong place.
Why This Matters
This is not just about style. The consequences are real:
- Learners think they are “trained” but cannot solve actual business problems.
- Businesses remain stuck in Excel Hell.
- A $100 billion FP&A/ERP industry profits from the belief that Excel cannot scale — when in fact it can.
My Alternative Model
Here is the alternative I am building:
- AI delivers the User Guide. The demos. The repeatable, mechanical skills.
- I deliver the navigation. Live, interactive, strategic teaching.
- Students get a consistent framework. Both in the packaged material and in the on-demand AI assistant trained on my methods.
This way, learners know not only what the tools are, but also how to apply them to create real value.
A Call for Higher Standards
If you are learning Excel, remember: most tutorials are just the User Guide, read aloud. Valuable as far as it goes — but not enough.
If you are teaching Excel, ask yourself: are you putting your energy into being seen, or into being useful? Are you helping learners get from A to B, or are you showing them how to switch on the radio and enjoy the ride?
The teaching profession — and the business world — deserves better.
That is why I am doing it differently.
Add comment